On 6 June 2016 at 05:09, rindeal <[email protected]> wrote:
> It is not, unless CI filters the broken commits in some miraculous
> way. With the current approach, both stable and master branch will
> contain the pollution of broken commits + their fixes, instead of
> having good commits only.


Doing that is of course, impossibly hard without having every
committer publish to their own branch, and having the "master" built
by *cherry* picking commit series that are "known good".

Its doable, but the complexity it entails is just way more than is
suitable for the gentoo workflow, and is likely to create more
problems than it solves.

The "no bad commits" requires there to be at last *some* branch
somewhere that is constantly not-fast-fowardwardable, and at least one
branch that serves as a synchronization point with strictly linear
history.

-- 
Kent

KENTNL - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL

Reply via email to